On 13/08/2019 17:24, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 06:02:52PM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>> Added a simple mangle testcase which messes with the ucontext_t
>
> Strange past tense? How about "Add"?
>
>> from within the sig_handler, trying to set PSTATE DAIF bits to an
>
> "signal handler"?
>
Ok I'll fix the commit message and use imperative mood.
Cheers
Cristian
>> invalid value (masking everything). Expects SIGSEGV on test PASS.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> .../arm64/signal/testcases/.gitignore | 1 +
>> .../mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits.c
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/.gitignore b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/.gitignore
>> index 8651272e3cfc..8a0a29f0cc2a 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/.gitignore
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/.gitignore
>> @@ -1 +1,2 @@
>> mangle_pstate_invalid_compat_toggle
>> +mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits.c b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 000000000000..af899d4bb655
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/signal/testcases/mangle_pstate_invalid_daif_bits.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>> +/* Copyright (C) 2019 ARM Limited */
>> +
>> +#include "test_signals_utils.h"
>> +#include "testcases.h"
>> +
>> +static int mangle_invalid_pstate_run(struct tdescr *td, siginfo_t *si,
>> + ucontext_t *uc)
>> +{
>> + ASSERT_GOOD_CONTEXT(uc);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * This config should trigger a SIGSEGV by Kernel when it checks
>> + * the sigframe consistency in valid_user_regs() routine.
>> + */
>> + uc->uc_mcontext.pstate |= PSR_D_BIT | PSR_A_BIT | PSR_I_BIT | PSR_F_BIT;
>> +
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>
> Hmmm, there was a lot of common framework code, but it seems like a good
> investment if adding a new test is as simple as this :)
>
> [...]
>
> Cheers
> ---Dave
>
